ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2022
Factors predictive of parametrial boost in patients with cervical cancer treated with definitive chemoradiation.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study is to identify demographic, clinical, and treatment-related characteristics associated with the prescription of parametrial boost (PMB) in cervical cancer patients undergoing definitive chemoradiation. MATERIALS/
methodsA retrospective chart review of 132 non-metastatic cervical cancer patients treated with definitive chemoradiation from May 2017 to December 2019 was performed. Demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics were obtained and compared between those who received PMB and those who did not. Clinical outcomes (pelvic recurrence, tumor persistence, distant metastases, and median survival time) were also gathered and compared. Statistical software was used for analysis, with a p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
resultsOf the 132 patients included in the analysis, 74 (56%) received PMB of 10 Gy in five daily fractions and 58 (44%) did not. Patients who received PMB were more likely to have pelvic sidewall invasion at the time of diagnosis (OR 4.053, 95% CI 1.163-14.13, p < 0.05) and received more cycles of concurrent chemotherapy during whole pelvis irradiation (OR 2.149, 95% CI 1.370-3.371, p < 0.05). At a median follow-up of 24 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the crude rates of pelvic recurrence, tumor persistence, distant metastasis, and median survival between the two groups.
conclusionPresence of pelvic sidewall invasion at diagnosis and increased number of chemotherapy cycles were predictive of administering PMB after whole pelvis irradiation. There was no significant difference in treatment outcomes for those with and without PMB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.